Sensitization instructions can reduce the misinformation effect and improve the eyewitness confidence–accuracy relationship.

Multiple studies have reported evidence that the misinformation effect can be reduced or even eliminated under some conditions, but these studies have typically used warnings that could not be implemented in forensic settings (e.g., telling participants/witnesses that a particular source included false information).In the present study, we investigated whether novel, ecologically valid sensitization instructions can reduce the misinformation effect.We also examined effects of the manipulation on the confidence-accuracy relationship.Across two experiments that used different stimuli and test formats, participants (total N = 422) were exposed to misinformation about a mock crime; later, half of the participants received sensitization instructions before completing a memory test.The misinformation effect was significantly smaller for participants who received the sensitization instructions.Sensitized participants also demonstrated a stronger confidence-accuracy relationship and were less overconfident at the highest level of confidence.Our findings encourage tests of the sensitization instructions under more naturalistic conditions. General Audience SummaryWhen people are exposed to misinformation, they often incorporate this information into their later memory reports.Research suggests that warning people about the presence of misinformation can improve the accuracy of their memory reports, yet these studies have typically used warnings that explicitly mention the presence of misinformation and could not be implemented in forensic settings (e.g., police interviews).Across two experiments, we examined whether ecologically valid sensitization instructions reduce the detrimental effects of misinformation on eyewitness memory.Participants watched a mock crime video and then read a narrative containing misleading information about the video.Following this, sensitized participants watched the sensitization video, whereas nonsensitized participants watched a video about playing musical instruments.The sensitization video told participants that memory is made up of information from several sources and that they had been randomly assigned to either an accurate or inaccurate summary of the video.Participants were not told whether they themselves had been exposed to misinformation.The purpose of these instructions was to emulate real-life situations, where it is often unclear whether someone has been exposed to misinformation, and to encourage participants to remember the original video with this possibility in mind.As expected, participants were more accurate at remembering details they were not misled about (control items) than details they had been misled about (misled items).This difference, however, was smaller for sensitized participants than control participants.Sensitized participants were also less likely to show overconfidence in the accuracy of their memories for misled items.For instance, when control participants reported being 90%-100% confident, they were only accurate 60%-67% of the time.Sensitized participants, by contrast, were accurate 75%-80% of the time.Our findings suggest that warning people about the mere possibility of misinformation can improve the accuracy of witnesses' memory and the informativeness of their confidence judgments.